Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Monday, January 21, 2019

Sept. 20 (Bloomberg) — You don’t often see Washington regulators publicly raising alarms about banks’ accounting practices. That’s why a speech this week by the comptroller of the currency, Thomas Curry, deserves more attention.

The way Curry described the situation, you get the sense that some banks’ numbers may be too good to be true. He made clear he wasn’t warning about an imminent crisis. Yet he cautioned that some banks seemed to have been “scrimping on their allowances against their loan losses,” which is a fancy way of saying they may be fudging their numbers.

To understand better what he was referring to, here’s a brief accounting primer. Loan-loss allowances are the reserves that lenders set up on their balance sheets for perceived bad loans. Provisions are the expenses they record to boost those allowances. As losses are confirmed, lenders charge off the uncollectible amounts, reducing the allowances.

Sometimes lenders decide, in hindsight, that their allowances are too big. When this happens, they may undo some of the provisions they had previously booked. Bankers refer to this as “releasing reserves,” which boosts earnings and capital. This has been happening at several large U.S. banks lately, such as JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. Investors often refer to these gains as “low-quality earnings.”

Curry, who became comptroller in April 2012, said some reserve releases are to be expected as underwriting standards, loan performance and the economic climate improve. “But for some banks, the ease with which the allowance could be repurposed as earnings has proved habit-forming,” he said, without naming any companies. He noted that “this is happening despite loosening credit underwriting standards, which suggests that risks are increasing that may result in larger charge- offs.”

Loan-loss provisions and charge-offs have both been on the decline industrywide for a few years. Curry pointed out, though, that provisions have been falling at a faster rate — a signal that banks’ optimism about their loan quality might be outpacing reality. During the second quarter of this year, lenders regulated by his office recorded about $6.1 billion of provisions, equivalent to only 56.6 percent of their net charge-offs, according to data compiled by the agency. A year earlier, provisions were $10.4 billion, equivalent to 67.1 percent of net charge-offs.

One result is that recent surges in capital, which banks tout as a sign of resilience, may in part be illusory. An easy way for a bank to overstate its capital is to underestimate its losses. To find a period when banks’ provisions exceeded net charge-offs you would have to go back to the fourth quarter of 2009.

One good sign is that the banking industry’s loan-loss allowances are still more robust than they were during the years leading up to the financial crisis. Allowances at comptroller-regulated banks were equivalent to about 2.1 percent of total loans and leases, as of June 30. That percentage has been declining the past few years, after topping 4 percent in 2010. Back in early 2007, the figure was a mere 1.1 percent, which helped make banks look healthier and more profitable than they really were.

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 35

3 responses to “Not Too Early To Start Worrying About Banks Again”

  1. rustacus21 says:

    It was my impression this question was to have been resolved on 1/22/09, after putting together a comprehensive jobs bill on 1/21/09? As both STILL are in crisis mode, are we to assume that Congress is being manipulated by extra-political forces (money, in other words), toward the detriment of the people & the system of which banks operate? I’m simply curious, since conservative Republicans are the obstructionary force preventing reform AND restoration of the STILL missing 8 to 10 million jobs the employment sector comprised, as of 1/19/01. A larger question still is, why aren’t more of the citizenry asking this question & thus, RESPONDING as if the know the ANSWER on election day(s) in 2010, 2012? Just curious…?…

  2. howa4x says:

    I hop e they all have a living will that will dispose of their assets after they go under as per Dodd/Frank. Tax payers will never stand for another bailout unless they all go to jail for fraud

    • ralphkr says:

      Ah, howa4x, didn’t you know that the banks have come up with a sure way to recover from failure? Since, as you say, the taxpayers shall not stand for paying for another bailout after FDIC is unable to cover the losses then they shall go with the Cyprus Solution and apply depositor’s funds to cover investment losses. The beauty of the Cyprus Solution is that those of us who deposited money in savings accounts are considered unsecured creditors (in other words, at the end of the line to be paid) while those who have items such as the insured sub-prime loan packages (a prime cause of the recession) are considered secured creditors and the first to be paid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.